From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: g.nault@alphalink.fr
Cc: ebiggers3@gmail.com, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com,
ebiggers@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppp: remove the PPPIOCDETACH ioctl
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:56:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180523.115636.2241611659399097483.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180523135708.GB1569@alphalink.fr>
From: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@alphalink.fr>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:57:08 +0200
> I'd rather add
> + if (cmd = PPPIOCDETACH) {
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + }
>
> Making PPPIOCDETACH unknown to ppp_generic means that the ioctl would
> be handled by the underlying channel when pf->kind = CHANNEL (see the
> chan->ops->ioctl() call further down). That shouldn't be a problem per
> se, but even though PPPIOCDETACH is unsupported, I feel that it should
> remain a ppp_generic thing. I don't really want its value to be reused
> for other purposes in the future or have different behaviour depending
> on the underlying channel.
>
> Also PPPIOCDETACH can already fail with -EINVAL. Therefore, if ever
> there really were programs out there using this call, they'd already
> have to handle this case. Unconditionally returning -EINVAL would
> further minimise possibilities for breakage.
I agree.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-23 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <f403043d0f18f879cc056648a875@google.com>
2018-05-14 6:11 ` KASAN: use-after-free Read in remove_wait_queue (2) Eric Biggers
2018-05-18 16:02 ` Guillaume Nault
2018-05-23 3:29 ` Eric Biggers
2018-05-23 3:59 ` [PATCH] ppp: remove the PPPIOCDETACH ioctl Eric Biggers
2018-05-23 13:57 ` Guillaume Nault
2018-05-23 15:56 ` David Miller [this message]
2018-05-23 21:17 ` Eric Biggers
2018-05-23 21:37 ` [PATCH v2] " Eric Biggers
2018-05-23 23:04 ` Paul Mackerras
2018-05-24 14:04 ` Guillaume Nault
2018-05-25 2:55 ` David Miller
2018-06-06 9:01 ` Walter Harms
2018-05-23 13:26 ` KASAN: use-after-free Read in remove_wait_queue (2) Guillaume Nault
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180523.115636.2241611659399097483.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiggers3@gmail.com \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=g.nault@alphalink.fr \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).